Live data from Hacker News

Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

economist.com

51–60 of 227 posts

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#51
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming by free you mean universal coverage that is (almost) free at the point of usage then this is a solved problem. What the United States lacks in order to realize a solution is political willpower and an electorate that is savvy enough to know that wanting such a system does not make one a communist. (And that being a communist does not make one an evil person.)

I'm not convinced, even with the best of intentions. In fact, I am convinced of the opposite: A) Universal Health program would result in terrible quality health care B) It would lead to longer wait times, and less choices C) It would be insanely costly to fund. We've been busy printing a lot of $. Increased the Federal deficit from $21T to $30 since COVID and there isn't a good way to fund a bloated system in USA, c…

> We already have free health for the poor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicaid

There are tens of millions of people who have no access to Medicaid because states chose not to expand it under the ACA, and there are plenty of poor people who make more than ~$16k a year, which is the cut-off for Medicaid.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#54
post #7

Google offers a lot of free services. Can they figure out how to make healthcare free?

Assuming by free you mean universal coverage that is (almost) free at the point of usage then this is a solved problem. What the United States lacks in order to realize a solution is political willpower and an electorate that is savvy enough to know that wanting such a system does not make one a communist. (And that being a communist does not make one an evil person.)

Canada has "free" universal healthcare, but to call it a "solved problem" seems pretty naive.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#56

Google offers a lot of free services. Can they figure out how to make healthcare free?

They will have auctions where the winning bidder purchases the right to decide what advertisements you are tattooed with at your next doctor's visit.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#57
As someone who worked in this area:

> Google is also giving health records another whirl. The new initiative, called Care Studio, is aimed at doctors rather than patients. Google’s earlier efforts in this area were derailed in part by hospitals’ sluggishness in digitising their patient records.

Not just digitizing but also in sharing them. Hospital systems are very very reluctant to send out a copy of their records, or even to let you query their system. Especially in the early days of EHRs there was very much a sense that it was their data and they didn't want to let data out because interoperability was a threat to their data moats.

That's good in a privacy sense, but it really did slow down adoption of interoperability initiatives. Finally Medicare/Medicaid basically forced it iirc... if you want Medicare dollars you will send Medicare your encounter data. So now you have to code your records at least good enough to at least get your medicare reimbursements.

> That problem has mostly gone away but another has emerged, says Karen deSalvo, Google’s health chief—the inability of different providers’ records to talk to each other. Dr de Salvo has been vocal about the need for greater interoperability since her days in the Obama administration, where she was in charge of co-ordinating American health information technology. Until that happens, Care Studio is meant to act as both translator and repository (which is, naturally, searchable).

Dead on. It's a hard hard problem though because during the early days we went through a Cambrian explosion in data diversity. Data is often coded very inconsistently or in ways that make it "invalid" to modern schemas. The "miracle of HL7" is basically just a fancy text format, and like the on-table records or XML documents it's still possible to code things in ways that still won't be parseable even if they're syntactially/lexically correct.

There are standardized schemas (f.ex NEDSS schema) available, but they are super over-engineered for a lot of use-cases and can perform quite poorly due to excessive "anything can map to anything" design and field-table-value formats. And again, they suffer from the "there's multiple ways you could code this" thing, just using NEDSS doesn't mean you interoperate with anyone, not close. Not sure what EHRs typically have underneath but it wouldn't surprise me if they all had their own solutions too, EHR software is universally dogshit.

Handling poorly-validated/normalized data from tens of thousands of facilities all doing their own things is a very tough problem, and honestly the only solution is to decentralize it a little bit, facilities have to look at their own data and see if it makes sense the way they're sending it or even if they're storing it wrong. Once it's just another record in a database, if it's not consistent and accurate it likely never will be. It'll just be yet another System-Specific-Record-Identifier in the list for that record, and since it's not coded right nobody will ever be able to read it unless it's patched by someone/some layer.

Data clearinghouses are uniquely positioned to gatekeep that a little bit, and over time there are tools getting written to help various facilities validate their data and see whether it's semantically reasonable. Almost everybody has errors especially if this is their first integration, but they can be brought up to speed on their ongoing record submissions, at least.

I'm sure google would love to be in charge of everyone's health data, or at least to get to see it. Commercial activity isn't notionally allowed but I wonder if HIPAA applies to aggregated data like that, they can probably set up The Business-Purpose Side with a firewall from the Gets To Make Money Querying Anonymized Data side.

It's true that this is a thing where there are intellectual economies-of-scale though. If you can get to One Standard To Rule Them All and actually make it work and not suck, that's useful, everyone just agrees to adopt Google Validation Rules and a shit-ton of terrible mapping/correcting labor gets saved once people get on board. There's just also not really anyone trustworthy enough to handle being the One Giant Repository Of Health Data, Google owning it eventually ends up in massive data mining of sensitive PHI.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#58
post #39
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I know this. However, in this age of easy information and knowledge about other societies readily available it becomes more a matter of willful ignorance than being duped by propaganda.

You aren't familiar with the propaganda if you think folks duped by it would consider "other societies" with anything other than fear hatred and contempt. The problem with "do your own research" is confirmation bias.

What is the alternative? Counter-propaganda, my propaganda is better than your propaganda because mine is "right"?

I don't have a good answer to this question, I'm wondering if others do.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#59

Please no. They have too much info on everyone already

Step 1) Allow Gov to build up regulations so complex that it requires a force of nature to over come. Step 2) Big Tech builds technology around those regulations and sells it to people. Step 3) Viola! we have a giant massive ocean-like moat that surrounds the Big Gov + Big Tech castle. Never to be breached by the likes of Silicon Valley startups or otherwise. We are already in a dystopian time.

I see it frequently here... I suppose it comes from French. Viola means rape(il la viola) or break the law(il viola la loi). The real one is voilà! And dropping the accent, is apparently acceptable in English. Voila! ;)

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#60
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Yes, because what we need is more gerontocracy. People should instead just make peace with the fact that their purpose in life is to reproduce, die within a reasonable time, and hand the world over to the next generation.

I mean, I guess, tell that to every important artist, author, architect, craftsperson, and humanitarian. Paul Farmer and Norman Borlaug both had children, but it's hard to argue that their real purpose in life was to reproduce. Could you get more Paul Farmer time? Seems like a worthy goal.
Post reply on HN